|
Grex > Coop8 > #131: Nominations for the Board of Directors |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 246 responses total. |
robh
|
|
response 125 of 246:
| 
Nov 15 13:00 UTC 1996 |
Well, we can probably have a ruling for you after Wednesday's meeting.
|
e4808mc
|
|
response 126 of 246:
|
Nov 15 16:10 UTC 1996 |
I'm honored to be nominated, but I'm on time/commitment overload right now,
so I have to decline. Maybe in a year or two I can get unstrangled from some
of these things (Teenagers *do* grow up, <panic-striken voice> don't they!?!).
Meanwhile, I'll try to contribute to Grex in other ways.
Thanks for the compliment.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 127 of 246:
|
Nov 15 17:41 UTC 1996 |
I agree with John: In the past, candidates have been required to be members,
and I believe it makes sense to keep doing it that way.
|
scg
|
|
response 128 of 246:
|
Nov 15 18:21 UTC 1996 |
I agree with those who say that somebody should have to be a member to run.
However, if there is a board vote on the issue, I will abstain. I hope
Valerie will abstain as well.
|
mta
|
|
response 129 of 246:
|
Nov 15 19:00 UTC 1996 |
I'm curious why that is, Steve/
|
ajax
|
|
response 130 of 246:
|
Nov 15 19:42 UTC 1996 |
Steve and Valerie will both be running in this election, so voting on who
can run against them would create a conflict of interest.
|
dang
|
|
response 131 of 246:
|
Nov 15 20:14 UTC 1996 |
I agree with Steve, and Valerie and company. I feel that past precident
is right, and a person should be a member by the time of the vote. Is
the vote going to wait until wednesday for a decision?
|
remmers
|
|
response 132 of 246:
|
Nov 15 21:45 UTC 1996 |
There's always a two-week break between the end of nominations
and the beginning of voting. The election starts December 1.
|
mta
|
|
response 133 of 246:
|
Nov 15 23:16 UTC 1996 |
Oh, I see. Yes, that makes a kind of sense.
|
e4808mc
|
|
response 134 of 246:
|
Nov 16 00:19 UTC 1996 |
As one who is not currently a member, I would agree that you should have to
become a member to have your name on the ballot.
|
nephi
|
|
response 135 of 246:
|
Nov 16 07:32 UTC 1996 |
Ouch. This is what I get for procrastinating . . . I would have
loved to see ajax be put on the ballot if he would accept.
Oh well, I guess . . .
|
ajax
|
|
response 136 of 246:
|
Nov 16 08:00 UTC 1996 |
Wouldn't have accepted anyway, but thanks. If there were a shortage
of nominees who I'd like to see on the board, I'd give it a go, but as
it is, there are more than I can vote for. If only the US presidential
race offered such a dilemma. :-)
|
remmers
|
|
response 137 of 246:
|
Nov 16 13:44 UTC 1996 |
Just to clarify what I'm saying here about non-member candidates:
The board doesn't necessarily have to do anything, as far as I'm
concerned. If it doesn't, I'll just follow past practice and not
put anyone on the ballot who's not a voting member by December 1,
the start of the election. If the board wants me to do something
different than that, it should tell me.
|
remmers
|
|
response 138 of 246:
|
Nov 16 14:24 UTC 1996 |
Just to clarify what I'm saying here about non-member candidates:
The board doesn't necessarily have to do anything, as far as I'm
concerned. If it doesn't, I'll just follow past practice and not
put anyone on the ballot who's not a voting member by December 1,
the start of the election. If the board wants me to do something
different than that, it should tell me.
|
dang
|
|
response 139 of 246:
|
Nov 16 15:21 UTC 1996 |
Why was that posted twice?
|
dpc
|
|
response 140 of 246:
|
Nov 16 16:01 UTC 1996 |
Why was that posted twice?
|
chelsea
|
|
response 141 of 246:
|
Nov 16 16:43 UTC 1996 |
(This is John on Mary's account.)
I entered #137 in Backtalk, then for some reason did a "reload"
in my browser which posted it again. (I'll get this computer
stuff right one of these days...)
|
brighn
|
|
response 142 of 246:
|
Nov 17 15:44 UTC 1996 |
Mary, you're looking more and more like your husband every day.
I'd like to go on record as saying I support conditional membership as opposed
to the precedent: that is, if a non-member is elected to the Board, that
non-member may only serve if they submit membership dues. There may be
individuals who wish to be on the Baord, and are willing to pay for the dues
jsut to be on the Board, but who are otherwise uninterested in being Members.
I'm stating it as "for the record" because it's clear that the majority
opinion is to go with precedent.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 143 of 246:
|
Nov 17 18:43 UTC 1996 |
I oppose any non-member being a candidate. I've stated my reasons before,
but I also just noticed that if an election were conducted with a
non-member candidate, and that person were "elected", he/she would at that
instant be a non-member board member, and being ineligible to serve, the
position would be vacant and would be filled by the remaining board
members.
|
ajax
|
|
response 144 of 246:
|
Nov 17 20:35 UTC 1996 |
There's a two week lag between the end of elections and when their
terms start. Bylaw excerpt:
> d. Nominations will be submitted by November 15th and elections
> held between the 1st and 15th of December for terms to
> commence January 1st. The nominees receiving the most
> votes will be appointed to the BOD.
|
arthurp
|
|
response 145 of 246:
|
Nov 17 21:29 UTC 1996 |
Well, I feel pretty terrible to have been away from grex so much lately. I'm
way behind in a lot of discussions. And I've missed this one as well. I'm
sill only on #36. :( I almost wanted to run, but there are lots of
hesitations, so I wouldn't let that happen. We'll see in the future...
|
mta
|
|
response 146 of 246:
|
Nov 17 21:56 UTC 1996 |
If someone were willing to pay membrship dues in order to be on the board,
but was otherwise uninterested in being a member, I'd have to seriously
question their committment to GREX. (This from someone who was once nominated
to run and had to decline, because she was unable to afford membership at the
time.)
|
popcorn
|
|
response 147 of 246:
|
Nov 18 06:45 UTC 1996 |
Re 128: If there is a board vote about whether non-members can be on the
ballot, I will abstain.
Re 135: I've tried to nominate ajax for every Grex board election in the past
several years, including this one, but I haven't yet managed to persuade him
to run. I think he'd make a great board member.
|
davel
|
|
response 148 of 246:
|
Nov 18 11:52 UTC 1996 |
He would indeed, I'd say.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 149 of 246:
|
Nov 18 21:35 UTC 1996 |
Re #144: I suppose that can be interpreted to mean that if a non-member
can be a director-elect, they can then join and take office. The bylaws
are also silent on the first condition.
I think I am most opposed to an opportunistic candidate, who does not
support the system with a membership unless it benefits him or her. I can
think of situations where it would benefit Grex to entice a non-member to
be appointed to the board to fill a vacancy. That non-member would still
have to join before the board meeting at which the appointment will be
made, but it is ikely to be pretty certain that that appointment will go
through, unlike in an election.
|